Advanced search

Russian-Speaking Diaspora In Finland As A Public Diplomacy Tool

Full Text:


The article deals with complex studies of  the  Finnish case particularly migrants’ inclusion analysis into local cultural and political environments (as conditions to cultural and political environment stability) as well as public diplomacy impact evaluation of an important «soft power»  tool where migrants role is rather high. Authors scrutinize migrants’   interaction with  the  environment,   outline cause-and-effect   links of  this interaction, and unveil external factors that influence the respondents’ political behavior. The research  method is based upon interviews,  which result  in respondents’ typology development, political information channels were defined, and the influence of education and social inclusion upon political communication  was characterized. This method helps to perceive migrants’ integration policy at example of Finland, the fourth most attractive country  in the world in accordance  with the Migrant  Integration  Policy  Index.  Finnish experience could be highly useful for Russia in terms of both national migration policy development.   The resulting characteristics  of migrants’ political communication  might be of high interest in terms of migration policy regulation and understanding the issue of migration quotas, help to predict structural changes in society, also to provide the basis for making decisions on the effective use of public diplomacy tools.

About the Authors

Maria A. Pitukhina
Petrozavodsk State University
Russian Federation

Budget Monitoring Center.

Oleg V. Tolstoguzov
Karelian Research Center of Russian Science Academy
Russian Federation

Institute of Economy.


Irina Chernyuk
Independent researcher, researcher at Institute of Baltic Studies in Finland (2010-2012)
Russian Federation


1. Abashin S. (2012). Central Asian Migration: Practices, Local Communities, Transnationalism, Ethnographic Review, 4, pp. 3-13. (In Russian).

2. Anohina N.V. and Malakanova O.A. (2001). Political communication. In: E.D. Meleskina, ed., Political process: main aspects and ways of analysis. Moscow: Infra-M., pp. 213-234. (In Russian).

3. Brednikova O. (2017). (Not) Return: Can Migrants Become Ex? Ethnographic review, 3, pp.32-47. (In Russian).

4. (2018). Barcelona Center for International Affairs Official Website. [online] Available at: [Accessed 6 Jun. 2018].

5. Diligensky G.G. (1994). Social-political psychology. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian). (2013). Finland’s Future of Migration 2020 Strategy. [online] European Website on Integration. Available at: [Accessed 6 Junу 2018].

6. (2013). EUROSTAT Official Website. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 Dec. 2015].

7. (2014). European Social Survey Official Website. [online] Available at: [Accessed 27 Jan. 2018].

8. (2014). New Non-Discrimination Act entered into force. [online] Ministry of Justice of Finland Official Website. Available at: [Accessed 06. Jun. 2018].

9. (2016). Election Act (714/1998; amendments up to 361/2016 included). [online] Ministry of Justice of Finland Official Website. Available at: [Accessed 27 Jan. 2018].

10. Hillygus D. (2005). The Missing Link: Exploring the Relationship between Higher Education and Political Engagement. Political Behavior, 27 (1), pp. 25-47.

11. Kaiser M., Brednikova O. (2004). Transnationalism and translocality (comments on terminology), Migration and the national state, pp. 133-146. (In Russian).

12. Kyhä H. (2011). Educated immigrants in employment markets. A study on higher educated immigrants’ employment opportunities and career starts in Finland. [online] Doria. Available at: [Accessed 27 Jan. 2018].

13. Lee E. (1966). A Theoryof Migration, Demography, 3, pp. 47–57.

14. Mukomel V. (2011). Migrant Integration: Challenges, Politics, Social Practices, The Russian World,1, pp. 34-50. (In Russian).

15. (2015). Migrant Integration Policy Index Official Website. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 Dec. 2015].

16. (2015). Migration Policy GroupOfficial Website. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 Dec. 2015].

17. Mutz D. and Mondak J. (2006). The Workplace as a Context for Cross-Cutting Political Discourse. The Journal of Politics, 68 (1). pp. 140-155.

18. Nye J. (1989). Interdependence and the changing international policy, World economy and International relations, 12, pp. 72-76. (In Russian).

19. (2013). International Migration Outlook. [online] OECD Official Website. Available at: [Accessed 6 Junу 2018].

20. Olshanskij D.V. (2001). Fundamentals of political psychology. Ekaterinburg: Delovaja kniga. (In Russian).

21. Panarin I.N. (2012). Media, propaganda and information wars. Moscow: Pokolenie. (In Russian).

22. Price V. and zaller J. (1993). Who Gets the News? Alternative Measures of News Reception and Their Implications for Research, Public Opinion Quarterly, 57 (2). pp. 133-164.

23. Ravenstein E. (1889). The Laws of Migration: Second Paper, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 52, pp. 241–305.

24. Shestopal E.B. (2002). Psychology of power perceptions. Moscow: SP Mysl’. (In Russian). Solov’ev A. (2002). Political communication: to the issue of theoretical identification, Political studies, №3, pp. 5-18. (In Russian).

25. Sotirovic M. and McLeod J. (2001). Values, Communication Behavior, and Political Participation. Political Communication, 18 (3), pp. 273-300.

26., 2013. Statistics Finland Official Website. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 Dec. 2015].

27. Stouffer S. (1940).Intervening Opportunities: A Theory Relating Mobility and Distance, American Sociological Review, 5, pp. 845–867.

28. Timofeeva L.N. (2010). Power as political communication: materials of the methodological seminar. Moscow: Publishing House RAPS. (In Russian).

29. Timofeeva L.N., ed. (2012). Political communicative theory: theory, methodology and practice. Moscow: Publishing House RAPS. (In Russian).

30. Varshaver E., Rocheva A. (2014). Migrant Communities in Moscow: mechanisms for the emergence, functioning and maintenance, UFO, 3 (127). (In Russian)

31. (2017). International Migration Report 2017. [online] United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division Official Website. Available at: [Accessed 6 Junу 2018].

32. Yurev A.I., Anisimova T.V. and Samushova I.A. (2005). Issues of psychological-political speech communications in contemporary Russia, Vestnik SPbGU, Series 6, №3, pp.121-129. (In Russian).

33. Zazaeva N.B. (2012). Political communications in contemporary Russia, Power, №7, pp. 63-66. (In Russian).

34. Zimichev A.M. (2010). Psychology of political struggle. Moscow: Lomonosov. (In Russian).


For citations:

Pitukhina M.A., Tolstoguzov O.V., Chernyuk I. Russian-Speaking Diaspora In Finland As A Public Diplomacy Tool. GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY. 2019;12(2):6-17.

Views: 1237

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

ISSN 2071-9388 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1565 (Online)